On July 22, 2014, two separate U.S. appellate courts issued contrasting rulings pertaining to a key aspect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The issue at hand is language contained in the 2,700 page law addressing eligibility for subsidies (or tax credits) for those unable to afford the premiums for INDIVIDUAL health insurance. Specifically, the cases hinge of just four words - "...established by the state", or in its entirety - "[ACA] subsidies shall be available to persons who purchase health insurance in an exchange established by the state".
Since the overwhelming majority of states opted to defer to a federal or hybrid federal/state exchange (36) the language presented a significant problem. In effect, the language meant that only eligible individuals residing in one of the 14 states that opted to establish a state based exchange would be eligible for subsidies. The following graphic indicates (in white) those states that actually formed STATE based exchanges:
To access the complete article, click - https://www.smstevensandassociates.com/ResourceLibrary/tabid/192/Default.aspx
No comments:
Post a Comment